BACKGROUND: For individualized treatment planning in radioimmunotherapy (RIT), correlations must be established between tracer-predicted and therapy-delivered absorbed doses. The focus of this work was to investigate this correlation for tumors. METHODS: The study analyzed 57 tumors in 19 follicular lymphoma patients treated with I-131 tositumomab and imaged with SPECT/CT multiple times after tracer and therapy administrations. Instead of the typical least-squares fit to a single tumor's measured time-activity data, estimation was accomplished via a biexponential mixed model in which the curves from multiple subjects were jointly estimated. The tumor-absorbed dose estimates were determined by patient-specific Monte Carlo calculation. RESULTS: The mixed model gave realistic tumor time-activity fits that showed the expected uptake and clearance phases even with noisy data or missing time points. Correlation between tracer and therapy tumor-residence times (r=0.98; p<0.0001) and correlation between tracer-predicted and therapy-delivered mean tumor-absorbed doses (r=0.86; p<0.0001) were very high. The predicted and delivered absorbed doses were within ± 25% (or within ± 75 cGy) for 80% of tumors. CONCLUSIONS: The mixed-model approach is feasible for fitting tumor time-activity data in RIT treatment planning when individual least-squares fitting is not possible due to inadequate sampling points. The good correlation between predicted and delivered tumor doses demonstrates the potential of using a pretherapy tracer study for tumor dosimetry-based treatment planning in RIT.
BACKGROUND: For individualized treatment planning in radioimmunotherapy (RIT), correlations must be established between tracer-predicted and therapy-delivered absorbed doses. The focus of this work was to investigate this correlation for tumors. METHODS: The study analyzed 57 tumors in 19 follicular lymphomapatients treated with I-131 tositumomab and imaged with SPECT/CT multiple times after tracer and therapy administrations. Instead of the typical least-squares fit to a single tumor's measured time-activity data, estimation was accomplished via a biexponential mixed model in which the curves from multiple subjects were jointly estimated. The tumor-absorbed dose estimates were determined by patient-specific Monte Carlo calculation. RESULTS: The mixed model gave realistic tumor time-activity fits that showed the expected uptake and clearance phases even with noisy data or missing time points. Correlation between tracer and therapy tumor-residence times (r=0.98; p<0.0001) and correlation between tracer-predicted and therapy-delivered mean tumor-absorbed doses (r=0.86; p<0.0001) were very high. The predicted and delivered absorbed doses were within ± 25% (or within ± 75 cGy) for 80% of tumors. CONCLUSIONS: The mixed-model approach is feasible for fitting tumor time-activity data in RIT treatment planning when individual least-squares fitting is not possible due to inadequate sampling points. The good correlation between predicted and delivered tumor doses demonstrates the potential of using a pretherapy tracer study for tumor dosimetry-based treatment planning in RIT.
Authors: K F Koral; J Li; Y Dewaraja; C L Barrett; D D Regan; K R Zasadny; S G Rommelfanger; I R Francis; M S Kaminski; R L Wahl Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Yuni K Dewaraja; Matthew J Schipper; Peter L Roberson; Scott J Wilderman; Hanan Amro; Denise D Regan; Kenneth F Koral; Mark S Kaminski; Anca M Avram Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2010-06-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: George Sgouros; Shannon Squeri; Ase M Ballangrud; Katherine S Kolbert; Jerrold B Teitcher; Katherine S Panageas; Ronald D Finn; Chaitanya R Divgi; Steven M Larson; Andrew D Zelenetz Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Antigoni Divoli; Sophie Chiavassa; Ludovic Ferrer; Jacques Barbet; Glenn D Flux; Manuel Bardiès Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-01-21 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Peter L Roberson; Lauren B Smith; Meredith A Morgan; Matthew J Schipper; Scott J Wilderman; Anca M Avram; Mark S Kaminski; Yuni K Dewaraja Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 3.099
Authors: Young Sub Lee; Jin Su Kim; Jung Young Kim; Byung Il Kim; Sang Moo Lim; Hee-Joung Kim Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2014-12-30 Impact factor: 3.099
Authors: Yuni K Dewaraja; Matthew J Schipper; Jincheng Shen; Lauren B Smith; Jure Murgic; Hatice Savas; Ehab Youssef; Denise Regan; Scott J Wilderman; Peter L Roberson; Mark S Kaminski; Anca M Avram Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-05-19 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Jay H Solanki; Thomas Tritt; Jordan B Pasternack; Julia J Kim; Calvin N Leung; Jason D Domogauer; Nicholas W Colangelo; Venkat R Narra; Roger W Howell Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Abigail E Besemer; Joseph J Grudzinski; Jamey P Weichert; Lance T Hall; Bryan P Bednarz Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 3.099
Authors: Peter L Roberson; Scott J Wilderman; Anca M Avram; Mark S Kaminski; Matthew J Schipper; Yuni K Dewaraja Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 3.099
Authors: Yuni K Dewaraja; Michael Ljungberg; Alan J Green; Pat B Zanzonico; Eric C Frey; Wesley E Bolch; A Bertrand Brill; Mark Dunphy; Darrell R Fisher; Roger W Howell; Ruby F Meredith; George Sgouros; Barry W Wessels Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Edwin J Baldelomar; David E Reichert; Kooresh I Shoghi; Scott C Beeman; Jennifer R Charlton; Lori Strong; Nikki Fettig; Amanda Klaas; Kevin M Bennett Journal: Am J Physiol Renal Physiol Date: 2020-12-07